[Bug 740506]

(In reply to comment #19) I know that LibreOffice uses NSS as when I look at digital signatures my certificates from Firefox is availble. However, I don't think the LibreOffice Ubuntu packages require the whole Firefox to be installed. -- You received this bug notification because you are a

[Bug 740506]

(In reply to comment #37) Hi, as I cannot help with coding (on this specific issue), I've opened a bounty on FreedomSponsors: http://www.freedomsponsors.org/core/issue/319/support-for-digital-signatures Anyone interested on this bug is welcome to pledge more money by visiting the above

[Bug 1085526]

(In reply to comment #37) Hi, as I cannot help with coding (on this specific issue), I've opened a bounty on FreedomSponsors: http://www.freedomsponsors.org/core/issue/319/support-for-digital-signatures Anyone interested on this bug is welcome to pledge more money by visiting the above

[Bug 1085526]

There is now a new sponsor. Bounty is up to US $300. I hope there will be some more progress here soon. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Desktop Bugs, which is subscribed to evince in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1085526 Title: ubuntu pdf doc

[Bug 740506]

There is now a new sponsor. Bounty is up to US $300. I hope there will be some more progress here soon. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Desktop Bugs, which is subscribed to poppler in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/740506 Title: verify digital

[Bug 740506]

I'm trying to build the branch (on Fedora 21) but obviously I am missing some dependency or not having the right versions etc. Anyone having an idea? Build output: --- [user@dev-21 poppler]$ sudo yum install nspr-devel Loaded plugins: langpacks, post-transaction-actions, yum-qubes-hooks Package

[Bug 1085526]

(In reply to Markus Kilås from comment #87) > I'm trying to build the branch (on Fedora 21) but obviously I am missing > some dependency or not having the right versions etc. Anyone having an idea? > > Build output: > --- > [user@dev-21 poppler]$ sudo yum install nspr-deve

[Bug 1085526]

I'm trying to build the branch (on Fedora 21) but obviously I am missing some dependency or not having the right versions etc. Anyone having an idea? Build output: --- [user@dev-21 poppler]$ sudo yum install nspr-devel Loaded plugins: langpacks, post-transaction-actions, yum-qubes-hooks Package

[Bug 1085526]

(In reply to Adrian Johnson from comment #89) > (In reply to Markus Kilås from comment #88) > > I found a workaround for my build issue by creating symlinks: > > /usr/include/nspr -> /usr/include/nspr4 > > /usr/inclyde/nss -> /usr/include/nss3 > > Are you

[Bug 740506]

(In reply to Markus Kilås from comment #87) > I'm trying to build the branch (on Fedora 21) but obviously I am missing > some dependency or not having the right versions etc. Anyone having an idea? > > Build output: > --- > [user@dev-21 poppler]$ sudo yum install nspr-deve

[Bug 740506]

(In reply to Adrian Johnson from comment #89) > (In reply to Markus Kilås from comment #88) > > I found a workaround for my build issue by creating symlinks: > > /usr/include/nspr -> /usr/include/nspr4 > > /usr/inclyde/nss -> /usr/include/nss3 > > Are you

[Bug 1085526]

(In reply to Adrian Johnson from comment #91) > What is the output of "pkg-config --cflags nss"? [user@dev-21 poppler]$ pkg-config --cflags nss -I/usr/include/nss3 -I/usr/include/nspr4 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Desktop Bugs, which is subscribed to

[Bug 740506]

(In reply to Adrian Johnson from comment #91) > What is the output of "pkg-config --cflags nss"? [user@dev-21 poppler]$ pkg-config --cflags nss -I/usr/include/nss3 -I/usr/include/nspr4 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Desktop Bugs, which is subscribed to

[Bug 1085526]

Created attachment 119174 Handle SEC_ERROR_UNTRUSTED_ISSUER When verifying a PDF signed by a certificate issued by a CA not in the trust store I would expect to get an error "Certificate isn't Trusted" however currently the error message actually is the more generic "Unknown issue with

[Bug 740506]

Created attachment 119174 Handle SEC_ERROR_UNTRUSTED_ISSUER When verifying a PDF signed by a certificate issued by a CA not in the trust store I would expect to get an error "Certificate isn't Trusted" however currently the error message actually is the more generic "Unknown issue with

[Bug 1085526]

(In reply to Albert Astals Cid from comment #102) > So we're stuck on "need to use the offset" part, right? > > Could someone try to do make the code use it even if we don't have any pdf > that needs it? I am not sure if it is good to apply the robustness principle on security functions. In

[Bug 740506]

(In reply to Albert Astals Cid from comment #102) > So we're stuck on "need to use the offset" part, right? > > Could someone try to do make the code use it even if we don't have any pdf > that needs it? I am not sure if it is good to apply the robustness principle on security functions. In

[Bug 740506]

Created attachment 120758 Fix printf for unsigned int In pdfsig.cc the NetBeans IDE gave warning: Mismatching the argument type "unsigned int" and conversion specifier "d" The attached patch changes from %d to %u in the printf. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of

[Bug 1085526]

(In reply to Markus Wernig from comment #104) > I think the correct statement to issue in this case would be that a part > ("revision") of the PDF has been signed and to show the validation result > for that revision, ideally giving the user a chance to view only the signed > part. > > This might

[Bug 1085526]

Created attachment 120758 Fix printf for unsigned int In pdfsig.cc the NetBeans IDE gave warning: Mismatching the argument type "unsigned int" and conversion specifier "d" The attached patch changes from %d to %u in the printf. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of

[Bug 740506]

Created attachment 120760 Considering offset 0 and signature only covering part of PDF Note that this patch has not been tested with a non-zero first offset document. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Desktop Bugs, which is subscribed to poppler in Ubuntu.

[Bug 740506]

(In reply to Markus Wernig from comment #104) > I think the correct statement to issue in this case would be that a part > ("revision") of the PDF has been signed and to show the validation result > for that revision, ideally giving the user a chance to view only the signed > part. > > This might

[Bug 1085526]

Created attachment 120760 Considering offset 0 and signature only covering part of PDF Note that this patch has not been tested with a non-zero first offset document. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Desktop Bugs, which is subscribed to evince in Ubuntu.